https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241361 In revisional jurisdiction, interference with a remand order was unwarranted because the objections to notice validity, jurisdiction, and limitation could still be examined by the assessing authority after remand. The limitation objection turned on factual matters, including service of the remand order and exclusion of any stay period, and therefore did not require determination at the revisional stage. A mere wrong mention of a statutory provision does not vitiate an action when it is otherwise traceable to a valid provision, subject to the recognised penal exception where notice is absent under the provision under which penalty is proposed. On these facts, the remand caused no prejudice and no question of law arose for interference. en-us Fri, 25 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Dec 2013 08:46:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241361 In revisional jurisdiction, interference with a remand order was unwarranted because the objections to notice validity, jurisdiction, and limitation could still be examined by the assessing authority after remand. The limitation objection turned on factual matters, including service of the remand order and exclusion of any stay period, and therefore did not require determination at the revisional stage. A mere wrong mention of a statutory provision does not vitiate an action when it is otherwise traceable to a valid provision, subject to the recognised penal exception where notice is absent under the provision under which penalty is proposed. On these facts, the remand caused no prejudice and no question of law arose for interference. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 25 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241361